4.6 Article

Observations and analysis of two type IIP supernovae: the intrinsically faint object SN 2005cs and the ambiguous object SN 2005ay

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 460, Issue 3, Pages 769-776

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065704

Keywords

supernovae : general; supernovae : individual : SN 2005ay; supernovae : individual : SN2005cs

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims. To derive observational properties and physical parameters of the progenitor stars of type IIP supernovae SN 2005ay and SN 2005cs from their U, B, V, R, I CCD photometry, and to define their velocity behaviour. Methods. Light curves are analysed, and the velocities and spectral characteristics of SN 2005cs are obtained using synthetic spectra modeling. Results. Both supernovae are found to be fainter than the average SN IIP, with SN 2005cs being more subluminous and showing slight brightening in the second half of plateau stage in the V, R, I bands and a low expansion velocity. The effects of two different plausible distance moduli on the derived physical parameters of SN 2005ay are considered. Two approaches are used to recover the amounts of the ejected Ni-56, indicating masses of the order of similar to 0.02 M-circle dot, although late luminosities might indicate a higher amount for SN 2005ay, especially for the large distance case. Constraints on the progenitor properties are also presented, based on empirical analytical models. Two approaches are used to estimate the expansion velocities at the middle of the plateau phase. SN 2005cs represents an example of where all 3 physical parameters, velocity, energy and 56Ni mass are lower than average, a correlation not always observed in SNe IIP. SN 2005ay may belong to the same class if the shorter distance possibility is adopted. Furthermore, the estimated mass range for SN 2005cs is in agreement with limits established by using pre-supernova imaging.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available